My thoughts on Eliud Kipchoge's marathon/Nike stunt

Not My Reel Name wrote:

1. From now own the all marathon performances will be billed as "inferior" to this mark. Nevermind it was set up as a Nike stunt, it will affect every Kenyan athlete (as if there is not enough competition to stand out) as now a legit 2:04-2:05 will be treated as a "meh" in the sports sponsorship world. The .

utterly, completely, totally wrong

ignorant, actually

the winners of any of the Majors/Olympics will still get plentiful sponsorship

my take on your thoughts. Unless you provide us your real name and and well known in the sport, I don't care about your thoughts

Okay, I am going to give my perception on this as I have previously made a thread about this...

First, I am happy that I am not the only one who has this idea about racing.

Second, I am glad that others feel this could be bad for the sport.

How bad could it be?

In 1992, when I was a senior in high school, I ran the Carlsbad 5000. While I was pleased with my 19:56, I had no idea how fast people could be since most people I saw in cross-country were running mid 15s and low 16s, which already seemed quick. Keep in mind that prior to that, I was nowhere near a 19 anything. I was the slow runner...the 23, 24, 25 minute runner for 5K. Then, I saw William Mutwol and Richard Chelimo in the elite race come in in just over 13 minutes. Later, the next year, I got to watch Hanneck come in with a good time.

As a result, while I was not the quickest, I learned to love running as an art. As a result, after I stopped taking basketball seriously in 2006, I switched to distance running. Why? I switched because I loved the sport. I loved every part of it. I loved the amazing feeling and overall "niceness" running provided. Furthermore, in 2008, I had the privilege of watching Eliud Kipchoge's perfect running form as he won the Carlsbad 5000 that year. Then I was farther hooked on it and made attempts to emulate both his stride and later Meb's. I am still in the 19 range for 5K but I can successfully midfoot strike.

My point?

A stunt like this strips away the nuances of running and makes it an elite-only showcase where now time is ALL that matters. Furthermore, I would not see it far from possible that races will cut the times because others will seem "slow." Now, I am not afraid of being "cut out," as I can finish in the top 5-10% of a race, typically. However, racing should be allowable for all who want to train for a time and who can make that time.

It makes the sport as what happened in baseball. Between the time of McGwire, Sosa and later, Bonds, and then Cabrera's triple Crown, people rarely talked about other than the drop of home runs and hankered back to Bonds, McGwire and Sosa.

In other words, we establish running clubs and groups (I'm self-trained) for the purpose of inclusion, but we are finding ways to exclude people from running.

Why?

The truth is that I have no idea why, but what is happening to running is a travesty and personally, I feel it needs to stop.

Running is a natural thing that we do as kids, that we can later choose to do as adults.

It is not up to corporate America to strip that beauty of a natural act from us.

personally, I hate Nike for this.

Mike

San Marcos, CA

Not My Reel Name wrote:

He was a pawn for publicity stunt. I hope he was compensated to last a lifetime.

Are you suggesting that Kipchoge will never make any money again in racing? That's what it reads like. Obviously that is absurd, so why the hyperbole?

Not My Reel Name wrote:

Apologies from the jetlag, having watch the event and flying back from Europe I think I get a pass.

I stand by my assertion that this is not good for the sport for elites.

There is a lot of hypocrisy with powerhouse Nike and upstart Spira and what is considered "sanctioned" or certified.

My Bannister comment was that all athletes had the same shoes, oval track and 240 seconds to do what he did. No special gimmicks and Landy proved that true days later. This event had too many favorables thrown in, it wreaked of what it was, a publicity stunt.

You forgot to mention that this time trial had 4 million viewers.

You for got to mention that this was a time trail and experiment on the so-called barrier of 2 hours.

You forgot to mention that maybe the sport is moving ahead and new formats to watch the sport could be beneficial over the long haul of awareness.

You forgot to mention that the Spira shoes never really meant squat in the world of running footwear.

You forgot to mention that maybe new technologies with science behind them might help performance footwear that the masses might like. And yes going forward other brands will follow with their own versions.

You forgot to mention that publicity is gained from doing something out of the ordinary to bring awareness to something you want to bring attention to, in this case 2 hours for the marathon and fast shoes. By all intent and purpose it was the by far one of the most visible and talked about running events in history.

You may not like it from a purist view but from a big picture it brought more attention to running than any single one day event.

I stand corrected Ad weeks numbers were just updated.

5.2 million views on facebook

486,000 views on Youtube

Still trending strong on Twitter

In the world of marketing,advertising, PR and publicity this would be deemed a gigantic success.

I was very inspired by watching this event. I wish they would ditch pacers in all other races (marathons & on the track) so that the races would be pure. With that said, Imagine if Kipsang and a fit Bekele were lined up with Eluid for this event (with pacers)? That would be a true last man standing event. I think there's room for both types of events in my sport.

I want to see a Hamster Wheel marathon.

Yes. This is akin to Jim Ryun dropping a 36 Sec final 300m in his race, proving he could run, under optimal conditions, 1:39 and 3:24. This is why nobody has cared about 800-1500m races since then.

Track ceased to exist that day.

That is debated. Several other marathoners could be in contention for GOAT title including the current (legitimate) WR holder, Samuel Wanjuri (if he were still alive), Wilson Kipsang, and Bekele. Kipchoge even admitted that he had a workout partner (who rarely if ever races) more talented than himself. I am still not clear why there were only 3 elites attempting this mark and how they were selected--others could have challenged Kipchoge I believe.

He got 500K just for the attempt. Figure he made close to that in time bonuses so his payday was probably somewhere $750K and $1 million. That is one of the main reasons why he did this.

You know nothing. Great for the sport, great for him and great for Nike.

Marketability money and attention.

One day runners may actually make a living. Oh the horror. This might help it. I'd gladly agree that I have an allergy problem to be on Nike's payroll for $10M/y running races.

Every athletic group in every sporting endeavor is pushing the boundaries of legality because that's how you get ahead. Might as well make a living off it.

Otherwise feel free to only accept naked, shoe-less runs off diets of boiled rice as and water as legit.

Kev2 wrote:

I am still not clear why there were only 3 elites attempting this mark and how they were selected--others could have challenged Kipchoge I believe.

Money.

Kipchoge was selected because he is the Olympic Champion, 3rd fastest ever, a Nike athlete and he was willing to do it.

They throw a bunch of money at him plus a little to the other two finishers and to the pacers plus all of the money to set it up.

If other top level marathoners would be willing to do it for free I'm sure they would have let them in.

But they weren't paying a bunch of high appearance fees when they weren't looking for a race, rather a result.

Bit of a risk to me. They bet everything on Kipchoge having a good day.

And that bet paid off.

I'm pretty stoked about the event. I like the spirit of innovation and exploration.

BR800 wrote:

I just don't understand why Kipchoge wanted to do this. I'm sure he realises there is nothing glorious about this performance because it can't be compared to a real marathon. When people talk about the possibility of a sub 2 hour marathon, they mean a real race, not a show like this. He must know that his name won't be remembered for this and that the whole thing is just ugly and stinks and gives everyone a weird feeling. The only reason he did this was probably the money.

"because it can't be compared to a real marathon"

So you're saying he didn't run 26.2 miles? Last I checked, it wasn't downhill and it wasn't wind-aided.

This race is closer to the "real" thing than yall give credit. Did Kipchoge hop on a bike? He still ran 26.2 miles. Even with pacers, he still had to run 26.2 miles in 2:00:25. That is amazing.

You all make it out like a binary 0-1, Real / Not Real effort. I argue that it is closer to the real thing than not.

Also, to respond to the OP, I actually wanted to post that this race has actually HELPED the running world. Why?

Because all of my coworkers were talking about it yesterday and not only knew about it, but were excited about it. For all of the threads we start lamenting how running is an unpopular sport, this event got people excited and they started asking me questions about long distance running and realized how impressive it was to run a marathon in 2 hours, not just finish a marathon like all of those stupid people who run it in 4 hours and call themselves a "runner."

Seriously, I think the race helped gain appreciation of elite runners among the hobby joggers.

No, a lot dramatic.

There was nothing different about the shoes... it was all PR, and it worked.

The sport would benefit if some marathons were raced like this.

There are tracks all across the US that are not used all the time and it would be easy to set up something like this.

Most of these tracks have grandstands at different areas. Now you can watch the runners several times as opposed to one time as they run by.

Versions of this are already in place.

You have some marathons that are considered "fast" and the courses are flat, set up for record attempts, run with an army of pacers, etc.

Compare the set-up of courses in London, Boston, Chicago, New York Berlin...

Kipchoge doesn't feel that he was a pawn.

Why do we care what is great for Nike?Nike only cares about Nike and has taken over many aspects of the sport simply...for Nike.This is why most of the major athletes in track and field are Nike athletes and this is why Nike hosts the US Olympic Trials.Nike is what is bad for this sport because Nike spotlights athletes only for Nike.I will catch flak but I don't care. I wish to see Nike fold.They are not what running needs.

not stupid like ewe wrote:

You know nothing. Great for the sport, great for him and great for Nike.

Marketability money and attention.

One day runners may actually make a living. Oh the horror. This might help it. I'd gladly agree that I have an allergy problem to be on Nike's payroll for $10M/y running races.

Every athletic group in every sporting endeavor is pushing the boundaries of legality because that's how you get ahead. Might as well make a living off it.

Otherwise feel free to only accept naked, shoe-less runs off diets of boiled rice as and water as legit.

Tried this, and I'm back to tell you the event was not wind aided.You're a fat armchair pompous blowhard.

Your wrong wrote:

The event was in fact wind aided, because they had a major wind breaker driving in front of them. Instead of having a 13 mph "wind" in their face (their running speed against still air), they had lower air density which probably made it the equivalent of a 5 mph tailwind.

Try this: go run 8 mph into still air. Note your heart rate. On the same course, wait for a day with a 5 mph headwind, and then run your 8 mph. From an air resistance standpoint, that's the difference between 8 and 13 mph. Compare your heart rate between the two tests.

Then come back and tell me if the event was wind aided or not.

intersects wrote:

"The multi-year, multi-million dollar Breaking2 project was supposed to be

about Nike, for god’s sake—Nike’s innovations, Nike’s technology, Nike’s

dominance of the sport, Nike’s triumph over human physiology, and Nike’s

stuff you can buy. [...] Months of heavy hype attracted millions of eyeballs to

an event that turned out to be an ode to Eliud Kipchoge, not Nike."

I have to agree. The staging, the presenters, the pseudo-science, the

ludicrous pace-car, the "embedded journalists", the silly Roger Bannister

analogies, the "runner's world exclusive" articles beforehand were ridiculous.

The run, by Kipchoge, was not.

I just hope he'll get the world record in Berlin in the autumn. Until then, I'll simply

remember Nike as the shoe company who cost him a clear world record in

2015.